Who has the worst booking right now?

[Dynamic Dude Johnny]

Who has the wost booking right now between the WWE and TNA. In the WWE we have John Morison as ECW champ,Great Kahli as Smackdown champ and Cena never losing as the Raw champ. As bad as that sucks, TNA has all their belts on a single wrestler(I know its Angle but as awesome as he is it is still a really bad idea). Whats your opinion?

[chibidiablo]

TNA by far.
It's not even close

["Nature Boy" Ric Moranis]

I thought TNA Hard Justice was the worst PPV I've seen in years...

And then I watched Summerslam. There are so many inherent, misguided problems with WWE's overall booking, TV writing, and direction it makes TNA look like a fun little insignificent wreck in comparison. I know that Kurt Angle has all of TNA's belts, but still, he's Kurt Angle (even though he's in TNA).

If TNA had their own identical WWE equivalents of Great Khali, John Cena, John Morrison, Hornswaggle, Umaga, Cade & Murdoch, and Deuce & Domino controlling their belts...it seems like some on here would go apecrap and say TNA would go out of business in 3 DAYZEZ!!!1!.

For example, if their title situation were as bad as WWE (in comparison), the equivalents in TNA's current title situation would be something like...

Smackdown Champ: The untalented Test (in place of the untalented Khali).
World Champ: Ron Killings for a year and counting (in place of Cena).
ECW Champ: Bobby Roode (in place of John Morrison).
Cruiserweight Champ: Some midget who beats Sabin (in place of Hornswaggle).
Tag Champs #1: The recently fired Naturals (in place of Cade & Murdoch)
Tag Champs #2: Two boring lower card guys in cheesy greaser outfits (in place of two boring lower card guys in cheesy greaser outfits).

Maybe you can argue that TNA has less talent (I wouldn't), but using this particular comparison, you certainly can't argue that their booking is worse than the crap Vince is feeding us...

And if you REALLY wanna pick nits...Kurt Angle (with all the belts) is always > John Cena with all the belts. And I won't get started on the stupidity and eventual pointlessness of the "Vince's son" angle.

[Push R Truth]

Look at your own signature before you throw too many stones




My view is always jaded, because I LOVE absurd booking. Not absurd John Cena 17 year title riegns, but crap like Umaga eating Santino and Vince skits.


So I have no room to talk about quality ;D But at least I can follow a WWE crappy storyline.

[Mr. Mediocre]

I don't know...I was really, really pissed off about a lot of SummerSlam (seriously...WWE has gotten more repetitive than a marathon of Nitros), but I'm still going with TNA by a little bit.

[hollywood]

I gotta go with TNA. WWE's biggest problem right now is that nothing new happens. Cena always wins. Vince is still an overbearing, rich bastard (I'm talking character, here). Batista is screwed out of yet another title shot. And so on...

TNA, on the other hand, is nothing but ongoing WTF moments that give me a headache. (Well, it would if I actually watched. Reading about it only gives me a slight pain that fades quickly enough. )

[ddt]

WWE. TNA's booking may be off right now, but it hasn't been consistently bad. I stopped watching the WWE years ago, but from what I've heard and from what I've read (and even from parts I've seen here and there), WWE booking has been Wrestlecrap for years.

["Nature Boy" Ric Moranis]

hollywood said:

I gotta go with TNA. WWE's biggest problem right now is that nothing new happens. Cena always wins. Vince is still an overbearing, rich bastard (I'm talking character, here). Batista is screwed out of yet another title shot. And so on...

TNA, on the other hand, is nothing but ongoing WTF moments that give me a headache. (Well, it would if I actually watched. Reading about it only gives me a slight pain that fades quickly enough. )

"Nothing new happens" is the definition of bad booking. You don't need storylines to go 6,000 MPH like Russo/TNA, but "nothing new" happening has eventually killed just about every single wrestling company that ever died...pre-WCW's death.

Just something to think about.

[Deleted]

The reason I llke TNA a lot better is I get the impression that they're at least trying.

Sometime, they may fail miserably at trying to put on a good show, but there's effort.

Where as everything in the WWE is half assed, recycled BS. That seems to be booked, when the writers take a break from playing X-box.

[Ace Diamond]

TNA: They have a football player barely anybody outside of football's fanbase knows about going for the tag titles.

WWE's only problem is not doing anything new in the main event and only having 2 people in each main-event scene at any given time.

[radicalbuttercup]

One guy with all the belts who may possibly keep them all for an upwards of two months until he drops them to the owner? Why hello there, TNA!

["Nature Boy" Ric Moranis]

aodpilot said:

TNA: They have a football player barely anybody outside of football's fanbase knows about going for the tag titles.

WWE's only problem is not doing anything new in the main event and only having 2 people in each main-event scene at any given time.

To say that's WWE's "only problem" is a monumental understatement.

Look, I hate TNA's product right now, but I can watch an hour of their television (especially with the magic of DVR). Even when the booking is terrible, and they're making horrible decisions that could kill their company, at least it isn't boring. I cannot watch WWE TV for one hour straight anymore under any circumstances...much less five hours a week.

RAW and Smackdown right now are more boring than WCW Nitro and Thunder circa 1998, when WCW had no idea where they were taking the company and just threw a bunch of long, boring, drawn-out (or worse...MEANINGLESS) crap that never pays off because they're booking it on the fly and don't really know or care where they're headed...

But to each their own, I guess...

[Ace Diamond]

aaaaaaaaa said:

aodpilot said:

TNA: They have a football player barely anybody outside of football's fanbase knows about going for the tag titles.

WWE's only problem is not doing anything new in the main event and only having 2 people in each main-event scene at any given time.

To say that's WWE's "only problem" is a monumental understatement.

Look, I hate TNA's product right now, but I can watch an hour of their television (especially with the magic of DVR). Even when the booking is terrible, and they're making horrible decisions that could kill their company, at least it isn't boring. I cannot watch WWE TV for one hour straight anymore under any circumstances...much less five hours a week.

RAW and Smackdown right now are more boring than WCW Nitro and Thunder circa 1998, when WCW had no idea where they were taking the company and just threw a bunch of long, boring, drawn-out (or worse...MEANINGLESS) crap that never pays off because they're booking it on the fly and don't really know or care where they're headed...

But to each their own, I guess...

Yeah but see I only mentioned the worst offenses of both companies. TNA has sandblasted both their midcard and tag division at Kurt Angle and PacMan's expense, they've put Daniels BACK in the X-Division despite his promo stating he didn't want to tread water there anymore, they keep jobbing out the MCMG, list goes on.

Oh, and we're supposed to cheer the Steiner's for wanting 5 minutes with Karen Angle.

To quote the man himself..."HEH?"

[HMARK Center]

Normally I'd say WWE, especially since just TWO months ago TNA was looking very, very good, with an excellent July pay per view and the Impacts leading up to it...but I'm still absolutely floored how TNA went from 60-to-0 in 1.3 seconds. They took just about all the goodwill they were building and threw it away.

So, equal, but they have different reasons for being awful right now. Someone here once put it this way: TNA is the hot chick at a party who constantly gives you the flirty-eyes, kind of lets you see a little skin from afar, tempting you...but shoots you down ANY time you get close. WWE, on the other hand, is the single 45 year old mother of four with a raspy voice from smoking too many Lucky's who DARES you to watch her.

I'm not going to bother wasting much time on either them for quite awhile, methinks.

[Nice Guy Cody]

I'd say they're both on equal levels of suck, being as I don't have rose-tinted goggles towards either fed that cause me to talk about how rotten the state of TNA is while simultaneously going on about how the illegitimate kid/limo angle/whatever godawful storyline WWE creative has cooked up this week is brilliant television that's doing 10097643$6583!0970,#000 skajillion .5 in the ratings.
Or vice versa.

[AriadosMan]

I picked equally, because they both have seriously overpushed champions with no chance of losing. In short, they have pretty much the same problem in my eyes.

[hollywood]

aaaaaaaaa said:

hollywood said:

I gotta go with TNA. WWE's biggest problem right now is that nothing new happens. Cena always wins. Vince is still an overbearing, rich bastard (I'm talking character, here). Batista is screwed out of yet another title shot. And so on...

TNA, on the other hand, is nothing but ongoing WTF moments that give me a headache. (Well, it would if I actually watched. Reading about it only gives me a slight pain that fades quickly enough. )

"Nothing new happens" is the definition of bad booking. You don't need storylines to go 6,000 MPH like Russo/TNA, but "nothing new" happening has eventually killed just about every single wrestling company that ever died...pre-WCW's death.

Just something to think about.

I never said WWE didn't have bad booking. I pointed out the various things I don't like about them. But the question was who I think is worse, and that's TNA. By a mile. Hell, by several miles.

(Although, honestly, I would normally pick CZW as the absolute worst. But they weren't an option.)

[poi zen rana]

aaaaaaaaa said:

Look, I hate TNA's product right now, but I can watch an hour of their television (especially with the magic of DVR). Even when the booking is terrible, and they're making horrible decisions that could kill their company, at least it isn't boring. I cannot watch WWE TV for one hour straight anymore under any circumstances...much less five hours a week.

this sums up my feelings pretty much.

another way to put it is wwe makes me feel like they are saying "so what if you don't like us it's not like we have competition", whereas tna says to me "we may do some really stupid stuff but we are trying to entertain"

wwe just seems more lackadaisical in their booking, which i guess comes with the territory of being the most popular by far.

[Schemer]

TNA is the absolute pits of booking.

WWE is just average. Raw isn't terribly well booked, but Smackdown under Michael Hayes has been very well booked (Considering what they have to work with). ECW has been fairly good as well, dispite only having one hour.

[mikedh]

I feel like this.

Raw and Impact are kind of similar, both are horrible yet not too boring. Smackdown is the most dull show on the planet and ECW is the only watchable mainstream wrestling show right now. Its wierd because Smackdown is better than Raw its just so dull right now.

So I guess TNA is worse? They have the only show that is kind of enjoyable but they also put on more hours of bad TV a week. Tough choice.